Discussion: Appeals Court Strikes Down Law, Saves Mississppi's Only Abortion Clinic

TPM Article Topics
1

Discussion for article #225682

2

I wonder if the citizens of MS will re-elect this bozo of a governor. I loved it when he blamed Obama for the uninsured in his state.

Does anyone in MS care enough about this travesty to do something about it?

2 Likes
3

They’ll just find some other way to deny women healthcare.

2 Likes
4

Whew. I’m thinking maybe all the Miss. women who woke up just barely in time to vote down that personhood amendment they tried to ram through last year may be saying a quiet thanks to the judges right about now…

2 Likes
5

The panel ruled that Mississippi may not shift its obligation for
established constitutional rights of its citizens to another state.

I’m glad they decided the law was unconstitutional, but the reasoning they used seems mighty thin gruel to me.

1 Like
6

It’s a sort of bright line rule. Think of all the other things a state like mississippi would gladly shove into its neighbors: welfare, health care, education…

1 Like
7

Wow. Some sanity for a change.

8

I’m beginning to think that young women don’t care enough to fight for their rights.

And I’m getting a little tired of fighting the fight for them. They need to wake the F up.

9

Actually, the reasoning they use is particularly valuable. If MS can’t shift it’s obligation to uphold constitutional rights, then neither can LA, or TX, or any of the other states who’ve been using exactly that ‘they can get this in other states’ reasoning.

2 Likes
10

The young, in general, have not the experience to judge their priorities - and often, once they’re out of school, they’ve not the time to indulge those priorities.

11

They already mooch off other states’ tax contributions to the federal government. Welfare state Mississippi hates welfare - go figure.

12

Not really - what the court is effectively saying is that the state can’t excuse arbitrary rules that effectively ban abortion without explicitly doing so, by simply saying that another state can handle it. It’s a little narrower than addressing the arbitrariness of the rules themselves, but I suspect that’s due to the nature of the arguments.